UMSL Wraps Up Labor Class Probe

COLUMBIA, Mo. (KMOX) — The University of Missouri has completed its investigation of an organized labor course that drew fire from a conservative blogger for its handling of the topics of labor violence and intimidation tactics.

The University has released a statement concluding that the original videos showcased by the website BigGovernment.com “were definitely taken out of context, with their meaning highly distorted through splicing and editing.”

In one instance, the edited video omitted a comment by instructor Don Giljum saying that intimidation tactics would not work in this day and age. In another clip, the BigGovernment video cut out a portion of a statement by a Kansas City instructor in which she attributed a statement condoning labor violence to a historical labor figure — making it sound as if she was condoning violence.

The statement from the University of Missouri also indicates that UMSL instructor Giljum has not been fired, and is still eligible to teach at UMSL.

UMSL Statement:

May 9, 2011

Dear Colleagues,

We have finally completed viewing the videos originating at the University of Missouri-Kansas City (UMKC) from the UMSL course Introduction to Labor Studies. The excerpts that were made public showing the University of Missouri-St. Louis (UMSL) instructor Don Giljum and students as well as the UMKC instructor and students were definitely taken out of context, with their meaning highly distorted through splicing and editing from different times within a class period and across multiple class periods.

As stated previously, our campus supports academic freedom, civility, diversity, open discourse and the pursuit of knowledge. We support the academic freedom of faculty, staff and students at UMSL. Contrary to some reports, Don Giljum has not been fired from the campus faculty, and in fact, is completing the course; he remains eligible to teach at UMSL. We sincerely regret the distress to him and others that has been caused by the unauthorized copying, editing and distribution of the course videos.

During the past two weeks, we have received communications over a wide spectrum of viewpoints, and we appreciate people letting us know what they think. We have learned more about video and Internet technologies that can be beneficial or detrimental to positive, civil discourse, and security issues related to the use of such media. We shall explore ways to improve security in the use of electronic media for instruction, research and other activities.

In an April 29, 2011 item by Scott Jaschik, Inside High Ed published this false statement provided by University of Missouri professor Judy Ancel:
Ancel, the other instructor, said in an interview that she works on annual contracts and that the university has not taken any action against her. She also released a statement in which she explained the context behind some of the quotes shown in the video.
For example, she noted that one of her quotes in the Breitbart video is: “violence is a tactic and it’s to be used when it’s the appropriate tactic.” Here is what she said really happened: “After students had watched a film on the 1968 Memphis sanitation workers’ strike and the assassination of Martin Luther King, they were discussing nonviolence. I said, ‘One guy in the film … said ‘violence is a tactic, and it’s to be used when it’s the appropriate tactic.’ ” In this instance, she said, “Breitbart’s editing has literally put words in my mouth that were not mine, and they never were mine.”
That is demonstrably false and misleading and was addressed in a subsequent post at Big Government by Insurgent Visuals after an additional careful review of the film in question.
In fact, the activist she “quoted” from the 1993 film At The River I Stand, Coby Smith, said, “…we saw non-violence as a tactic, and a tactic alone,” not, as Ancel erroneously claims,”violence is a tactic, and it’s to be used when it’s appropriate, the appropriate tactic” (our emphasis). Smith’s original, full quote appears at 1:02 – 1:15, below:
Factually, the class had been primarily discussing violence, not non-violence, and as opposed to quoting Smith accurately, which she has since falsely claimed, Professor Ancel distorted, or otherwise misquoted, Smith, thereby defining violence as a tactic with some appropriate use within today’s labor movement using her own words to do it, not Smith’s.
Inside Higher Ed owes Big Government, Insurgent Visuals and its readership a correction, given that the publication appears to have been misled by Ancel.